On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Sterling Somers <brother...@hotmail.com>wrote:
> Curtis,
>
> Thanks for the response.
>
> I have been thinking about this approach since I started the project. I
> used OpenCV for the original model, comparing screen captures to one
> another. I was, however, rather sceptical about how much I could use
> OpenCV. I'm not much of a pilot but even I have trouble seeing the runway
> from the cockpit view. Subtracting the non-runway-colors approach might not
> work... That said, it might be the easiest approach, avoiding having to
> access any of scenery, scene graph, etc. I think if I give the AI pilot a
> sense of where it is, how far it's travelled, etc, I might be able to use
> that information to see the runway again, or at least eliminate run-way
> like candidates. I also came across Marcos Nieto's work on real-time lane
> detection. I wonder if I can use something similar to tell the pilot when
> the plane is more/less centred.
>
I have done a bit of computer vision work over the years, but I don't think
I'm what people would call an 'expert'. That said, I can imagine quite a
few challenges. First you have to have the runway in your camera's field
of view before you can do anything. Next it could be seen from any
direction or altitude or aircraft orientation and would thus need to be
detected.
You may want to think very carefully about exactly what problem you are
trying to solve and what sensors you are allowed to use.
If your work is camera only, you may need to put the camera on a pan/tilt
so you can find and track the runway no matter what location and
orientation of the aircraft.
If you are allowed to use gps and are operating off of known runways, then
you could do quite a bit just from the gps and would only need the vision
system to correct for gps position (and imu attitude) errors -- on short
final and through the flare.
Many people doing this sort of work use differential GPS to locate
themselves within a cm or two and really don't need a vision system to
correct for errors.
But GPS can be jammed or lost, so there are times a pure vision only system
could be useful -- or vision combined with other non-gps sensors.
If you are looking for suitable landing places that aren't pre-defined
runways, then that's more exciting I think. Even if it's a clear runway,
identifying it in a variety of situations (time of day, visibility,
precipitation, etc.) from a variety of locations or camera orientations or
from a distance could be quite a challenge.
What about putting the camera at the touch down point and have it find the
aircraft against the sky and relay up corrections?
There are lots of things that could be done depending on exactly what
problem you are trying to solve and what sensors you are allowed to use.
If it was me, I'd beg to have a gps on board. :-)
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson:
http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/
http://www.flightgear.org - http://gallinazo.flightgear.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-users
